Twelve Simple Propositions: Climate Change and the Asia PivotWednesday, 26 March 2014 13:26 By DH Garrett, Truthout | Op-Ed "1. Climate change is the greatest challenge that humanity has faced. Climate phase change (abrupt climate change) is an existential threat that will render most the Earth uninhabitable. All signs point to this phase change as either already initiated or soon to be initiated.

2. Although most nations, including the United States and China, have varying levels of commitment to climate change mitigation and adaptation, they are about as meaningful as providing every passenger on the Titanic with a rubber ducky. Even if these commitments are met in full and on time - they are insufficient for preventing catastrophic climate change.

3. It would take an act of phenomenal legerdemain to conceal the fact that climate change - or rather the failure to act on climate change when it was still largely preventable - is the greatest security failure in human history. Despite more than 25 years of explicit warnings from the world's best climate scientists, the amount of greenhouse gases (GHG) being pumped into the atmosphere continues to rise. In fact, 60 percent of the total has been dumped there since the danger was known. " "5. There are three main components to any strategy for combating climate change at the mitigation level: radical decarbonization, a radical shift to ways of more equitable sharing existing wealth/resources and a radical shift to economies that emphasize personal and community well-being and the "dematerialization" of tangible commodities.

6. In terms of East Asia, a World War II-level industrialization effort to make a rapid transition to 100 percent renewables is feasible and, given energy costs for the region and the high dependency on uncertain imported sources, strategically and economically desirable. An East Asia Smart Grid linking all solar, wind, tidal and geothermal sources etc. must be implemented as soon as possible to provide the stable base load that a widely distributed smart renewable energy grid can provide.

7. Numerous studies show that the support system provided by natural systems can no longer tolerate the dominant economic system (short-term-profit-driven neoliberal capitalism). At a minimum, if something like TPP or an East Asian Common Market comes into being, complete supply chain carbon costs for all products, processes and services must be taken out of the realm of negative externalities and those costs fully incorporated. State A cannot be allowed to reduce its carbon emissions by shifting dirty production to State B. The atmosphere is a collective global commons. "[b] http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/22673 ... asia-pivot

One thing not mentioned is [b]reversing overpopulation to long term sustainable immediately or ASAP, before the natural crash in 30 to 35 years (or less if you are in Nigeria, India, or China).

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

1. Start by making changes at the local level where and how they make sense.

There’s no single catch-all solution when it comes to a complex problem like global climate change. The report’s authors recommend taking a local approach that addresses “risk reduction and adaptation strategies” that attend to specific socioeconomic processes and needs. Oh, and don’t wait for the perfect local strategy—just pursue all solutions simultaneously, even if they overlap.

2. We need change on all levels—from individual to government.

The report is clear on this: federal governments should be fostering and supporting climate action on the subnational or municipal level. Federal governments can do this by protecting vulnerable groups—like constitutionally-protected First Nations in Canada, for example—and having a diverse energy portfolio that doesn’t invest too heavily in highly polluting resources, like tar sands bitumen, for example. The authors also recommend governments spend time and money providing information to citizens, construct robust policy and legal frameworks to limit climate change-related risks and work with the private sector to ensure communities are adapting to a changing environment.

3. Make everything better for everyone and that will help the climate issue. Seriously.

If you work hard to “improve human health, livelihoods, social and economic well-being, and environmental quality” you’re pretty much guaranteed to make progress on the climate file. Governments should start working double-time on these fronts as a part of their climate change adaption and mitigation efforts. Co-benefits!

4. Don’t be single-minded.

Climate change in a way is the result of pursuing the objectives of a small sector of society. If we started to recognize “diverse interests, circumstances, social-cultural contexts and expectations” that could “benefit decision-making processes.” So, if local communities are suffering as a result of new refineries, coal-fired power plants, oil export pipelines or the expansion of the tar sands—take the interests and needs of those local communities to heart. Giving too much sway to vested fossil-fuel interests is exacerbating climate change, after all. And anyway, “Indigenous, local and traditional knowledge systems and practices, including indigenous peoples’ holistic view of community and environment, are a major resource for adapting to climate change.” We’ve got to stop ignoring these alternative perspectives.

5. Be inclusive and gain support when decision-making.

Governments can be a little bad at this—including diverse groups in decision-making processes. But it turns out, the brightest minds are telling governments to be more sensitive to context when thinking through decisions, and to make those decisions in concert with more diverse groups represented in the process.

6. Use the economy.

Economic instruments can “foster adaptation by providing incentives for anticipating and reducing impacts.” Investing in renewable and clean energy is a good place to start. And “improved resource pricing” might help too. Requiring companies to pay high prices for access to things like freshwater (for fracking companies, for example) or to extract carbon-intensive resources (the tar sands industry, for example) just makes sense.

7. Invest in research and science.

This is a recommendation fit for Canada: do science. Insufficient research, monitoring and observation can get in the way of making the right decisions and keeping the money flowing in the right direction.

8. Plan and plan for the long-term.

We tend to think short term, especially in the political realm. But that doesn’t work so well when we’re trying to resolve a long-term challenge on the immediate level. The report recommends getting serious about planning for the long term, to think ahead. This is crucial if we want to avoid making vulnerable groups more vulnerable.

9. Figure out how much adaptation will cost.

There’s little knowledge of the true costs of climate change adaptation on a global scale. Somebody, anybody, please start assessing this so we know when to put resources and where.

10. Limiting climate change is a great way of avoiding adaptation costs. Who knew?!

“Co-benefits (there’s that word again), synergies and tradeoffs” are just some of the great things that will come about from getting serious about addressing climate change. If we start using water, energy and land more efficiently, for example, we’re both limiting the causes of climate change while also preserving key resources for the future. Co-benefits come from many activities including energy efficiency, clean energy, reduced pollution, reduced water consumption, greening cities, recycling, practicing sustainable agriculture and forestry, preserving forests that also act as carbon stores. The benefits of practical and long-term decision-making just seem to be endless.

11. Start immediately.

It turns out the sooner we get started limiting climate change, the more time we’ll have to adequate prepare for adaptation. Mitigation, the report’s authors state, “reduces the rate as well as the magnitude of warming.” So, best to get started right away.

12. Seriously. Start immediately.

If we let climate change get worse, we’re just making more work for ourselves. The best time to take advantage of those great co-benefits and synergies is now. The longer we wait, the more those benefits will decrease. And that’s already happening in some places: “In some parts of the world, insufficient responses to emerging impacts are already eroding the basis for sustainable development.”

13. Overhaul your systems. Change it all, if it needs changing.

“Transformations in economic, social, technological, and political decisions and actions can enable climate-resilient pathways.” These kinds of changes don’t just help us respond to climate change but also help “improve livelihoods, social and economic well-being, and responsible environmental management.” And these kinds of transitions are a big deal when they’re supported by national governments. “Transformation is considered most effective when it reflects a country’s own visions and approaches to achieving sustainable development in accordance with their national circumstances and priorities.” But to do this well, we need to keep learning, be iterative, deliberate and innovate.

Well there you have it: the flipside of all those heavy risks and dark tales of drought, famine, violence and extinction.

The authors of the report make a compelling case for meaningful national change at the federal level. We just need to keep these guidelines in view as we work to implement future-oriented policy and practice at the local and federal level."

SIGN ON TO RECEIVE A 2014 NPG TEACHER'S PACKET

Each year, NPG's Teacher Packets become more and more popular - especially in early April as we head toward Earth Day.

"We touch base with thousands of teachers across the country at the beginning of each semester, inviting them to order their free NPG Teacher's Packet - complete with Student Fact Sheets and a U.S. Population Poster. We also offer these valuable resources to our NPG members and supporters.

If you are a teacher, know a teacher, or home-school your children, this is a great time to acquire your Teacher's Packet. Simply go to www.NPG.org and submit your completed online order form. We will mail your Packet to you within a matter of days.

Remember - NPG Teacher's Packets are available free of charge! The cost for printing and mailing is underwritten by generous contributions from friends and members, and is an integral part of NPG's educational mission.

Distribution of our Teacher's Packets serves as a cornerstone in our efforts to teach today's students - America's next generation of leaders - about the social, economic, and environmental dangers of skyrocketing population growth. We welcome contributions from all who wish to help us expand this valuable program. Visit us today at www.NPG.org to help - or to request your Teacher's Packet. Thank you." http://npg.org/for-educators/request-a- ... dium=email

CELEBRATING EARTH DAY 2014

"On April 22nd PBS television is presenting its American Masters premiere of A Fierce Green Fire, which it is billing as "the first big-picture exploration of the environmental movement." The one-hour documentary "spans 50 years of grassroots and global activism from the 1960s-2009 and connects the major causes of environmentalism, from conservation to climate change."

The film was written, produced and directed by Oscar-nominee Mark Kitchell who states: "The environmental movement is the biggest movement the world has ever seen, yet so broad and diffuse that we lack a larger sense of what it was about. A Fierce Green Fire is meant to take stock, explore the historical meaning, where we've come from and where we're heading."

Founded in 1972, NPG traces its roots to the early environmental movement. Our 42-year history of working to keep America focused on the destructive nature of population growth makes us an integral player in the battle for a sustainable future. We look forward to celebrating the launch of this important documentary and urge our members and friends to tune in."

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

I have been an environmentalist since my landmark paper in 1967 forecasting the population of 6 billion at the turn of the century. Others were way off. The main thing is that the crash was preventable up to 2000, and now it is not, and will happen in the 2040s to not later that the 2050s, and possibly even sooner than the 2040s. At the time it coincided with world oil depletion, as a coincidence only, but I saw it as a possible trigger. I was one of the first few who saw we needed NPG, ASAP.There would still be a kind of mitigation in that less people would die, if everyone went to one child or less families immediately. But nothing in human affairs is very immediate. Warnings go unheeded until it is too late, as a general rule.It was not hard to only have one child, and it was not hard to go all solar, and to build my Earthship. It was not hard to decide on a 4WD hybrid vehicle. All my water recycling and saving is for my own well which I could take much more from, but do not because of one big characteristic people must have to save this biosphere..... I am not greedy.The changes are possible in time to prevent our own and 9 million other species' extinction in 500 years. The changes will not make the Earth a pleasant place for the 400 years it would take to return to 20th century norms. There still would be the population crash, because we have been in overshoot for over 100 years. The main thing is to prevent this thermal maximum "event". We may have 9 years, or perhaps we have already gone too far.Of course, as time is consumed with educating the ignorant and fighting the denialists, time runs out to stop the natural process of methane turnover, initiated by human overpopulation and over-pollution of HGHGs.I have hope, but will be losing it unless some major action is taken (globally), or happens (like a super volcano eruption in this decade) to change the course of events.

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

as time is consumed with educating the ignorant and fighting the denialists, time runs out to stop the natural process of methane turnover, initiated by human overpopulation and over-pollution of HGHGs. Hansen thinks that the Venus Effect would only happen if all of the fossil fuel technically able to be obtained, is burned. That would happen if there was no population "crash". If there are 10% survivors and they go back up in population by burning the last reserves, it is possible.Personally, I think it will be very much like an accelerated and stronger PETM, with very long recovery, but probably not as bad as the worst extinction event.This probably is preventable by the called for 90% HGHG reduction by 2023-4. We need a world mobilization max effort to do it.

Here is another view;"There are a lot of moving parts that make up the national infrastructure – roads, the electrical grid, communication networks, water management, etc. – but the key point is that they are all interrelated. Poke one component and half a dozen others squeal. Take out the electrical grid and water treatment plants start dumping raw sewage. Throw a hurricane at a major port and, on top of all the bodies floating around, you disrupt shipping hundreds of miles up the river, leaving grain shipments to come within days of rotting on the docks."How Climate Change Will Kill Us in the Dumbest Possible Wayhttp://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/comm ... ssible-wayor this one with insufficient action in time;http://lasthours.org/

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

"I would never argue that we should ignore the problems being caused by climate disruption around the world—we need to acknowledge and take responsibility for them. But I believe it’s equally important to tell some other parts of the story: That we are not powerless and that we have solutions we can start using now./color]"

It must be done enough and in time, to stop the Arctic Methane Monster, if it is now still possible.

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

We can no more mitigate climate change than we can control the seasons or the tides. There is nothing unusual about today's conditions in either their level or rate of change which has often been exceeded by normal natural variability in just the last 4000 years.

We can no more mitigate climate change than we can control the seasons or the tides. There is nothing unusual about today's conditions in either their level or rate of change which has often been exceeded by normal natural variability in just the last 4000 years.

Humans have had such a profound effect that we are now in the Anthropocene Epoch. Temperature and GHG rise rates are 40 times PETM and will go toward 100 times as fast as that 17K year heat buildup. The last time that was even close was the Permian ELE. The natural processes let loose by excessive human population and pollution are apparently far beyond that denialist's brain power to grasp.

If, and that is a real question, we do not lower emissions 90+% by 2023, we stand no chance at all in a runaway methane CAGW fast phase shift.How do we, as a species on this planet, reduce emissions that much when 30% are from agriculture to feed the gluttony of overpopulation? Obviously population must be reduced also.Go to all no emissions power and no slash and burn farming, no diesel transport, only sails. NO jets, of course, blasting out incredible amounts of CO2. Electric and hybrid vehicles only. And the main thing, no kids for 20 years or so.A new morality is needed with a large amount of work ASAP, and denialists that get in the way should be composted as their best life purpose.

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

We can no more mitigate climate change than we can control the seasons or the tides. There is nothing unusual about today's conditions in either their level or rate of change which has often been exceeded by normal natural variability in just the last 4000 years.

Humans have had such a profound effect that we are now in the Anthropocene Epoch.

The human effect on temperature has yet to be detected much less quantified against normal natural background variation so that statement is plainly nonsense

Quote:

Temperature and GHG rise rates are 40 times PETM and will go toward 100 times as fast as that 17K year heat buildup. The last time that was even close was the Permian ELE. The natural processes let loose by excessive human population and pollution are apparently far beyond that denialist's brain power to grasp.

This is more unsubstantiated nonsense frankly

Quote:

If, and that is a real question, we do not lower emissions 90+% by 2023, we stand no chance at all in a runaway methane CAGW fast phase shift.

28% of our CO2 emissions come from our own respiration and the animals upon which we feed so I'm afraid that would be quite impossible

Quote:

How do we, as a species on this planet, reduce emissions that much when 30% are from agriculture to feed the gluttony of overpopulation? Obviously population must be reduced also.

Who would you volunteer first for that then ?

Quote:

Go to all no emissions power and no slash and burn farming, no diesel transport, only sails. NO jets, of course, blasting out incredible amounts of CO2. Electric and hybrid vehicles only. And the main thing, no kids for 20 years or so.

So basically you advocate the destruction of modern industrialised society as a solution then ? So what are you saving the planet for if there will be almost nobody left on it to care ?

We can no more mitigate climate change than we can control the seasons or the tides. There is nothing unusual about today's conditions in either their level or rate of change which has often been exceeded by normal natural variability in just the last 4000 years.

Ergo todays conditions are perfectly normal and are well within post glacial natural variability

CO2 Science does not publish the papers but their own interpretation of the papers of others, which is not scientific at all. They claim any perception of warming in any year within a couple of centuries of the MWP is evidence. The duration or the contradiction of the warming by other interpretations are ignored.

Humans have had such a profound effect that we are now in the Anthropocene Epoch.

The human effect on temperature has yet to be detected much less quantified against normal natural background variation so that statement is plainly nonsense

Really? The increse of CO2 in the atmosphere by ~40%, the measured changes in outgoing radiation as a result, combined with record warming measurments are not detection?

Quote:

Quote:

If, and that is a real question, we do not lower emissions 90+% by 2023, we stand no chance at all in a runaway methane CAGW fast phase shift.

28% of our CO2 emissions come from our own respiration and the animals upon which we feed so I'm afraid that would be quite impossible

So you do not understand how to separate the carbon cycle from emissions or you are not honest enough to do so? Emissions being discussed are the release of previously sequestered carbon not the short term carbon cycle.

Quote:

Quote:

Go to all no emissions power and no slash and burn farming, no diesel transport, only sails. NO jets, of course, blasting out incredible amounts of CO2. Electric and hybrid vehicles only. And the main thing, no kids for 20 years or so.

So basically you advocate the destruction of modern industrialised society as a solution then ? So what are you saving the planet for if there will be almost nobody left on it to care ?

That result is a possibility either way. The longer we wait to act the greater the probability becomes.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

CO2 Science does not publish the papers but their own interpretation of the papers of others, which is not scientific at all. They claim any perception of warming in any year within a couple of centuries of the MWP is evidence. The duration or the contradiction of the warming by other interpretations are ignored.

Really? The increse of CO2 in the atmosphere by ~40%, the measured changes in outgoing radiation as a result, combined with record warming measurments are not detection?

It doesnt matter what the CO2 is doing but what the temperature is doing and that is well within natural post glacial variability. CO2 is a red herring or that would not be the case

Quote:

So you do not understand how to separate the carbon cycle from emissions or you are not honest enough to do so? Emissions being discussed are the release of previously sequestered carbon not the short term carbon cycle.

There is no such thing as good CO2 vs bad CO2 . There is only CO2 the only directly measurable effect of which has been a greening of the planet over the last 30 years.

CO2 Science does not publish the papers but their own interpretation of the papers of others, which is not scientific at all. They claim any perception of warming in any year within a couple of centuries of the MWP is evidence. The duration or the contradiction of the warming by other interpretations are ignored.